Lessons from Bagawadh Giita

NOTES

01-25

paartha pashya-iti-an samaveta-an kuru-na iti

having placed the chariot in the middle of the two armies, shRii kRiishhNa says to Arjuna

… paartha, beholding in this manner [and] move away from all those intimately connected, part of and gathered/mixed with the kuru-clan-Not in this way here

... { getting caught up with the kuru like the kuru kinsmen gathered to fight}

shRii kRiishhNa's choice of the name – paartha, appears to have a hidden meaning of emphasizing that he is the son of pRithaa, a.k.a. kunti who is the widow of paaNDu.

The emphasis here may be on the lineage going up throuhg paaNDu to raajaa bharata. This is in contrast with the kuru and the selfish nature of the kuru king dhRitaraashhTra and crown-prince duryodhana.

He appears to be fostering tyaaga, giving up of the attachment to the kuru, putting him in the position of being separate from the kuru family and dynastic style of coveting and hoarding.

MOVE AWAY - appears to be a message of "do not give in to unnecessary emotional attachment".

Here shRii kRiishhNa is telling Arjuna to move away from consdiering himself part of the kuru family, including those who are inextricably mixed in with the kuru {bhiishhma, dRoNa and others} and hold on to the ideals of his mother and her side of the family, paaNDu, kuntibhoja, vasudeva, yadu and bharata.

the message is to go outside of the box of attachments likes & dislikes and to look at the larger picture of dharma and the need sof the many who are not "family"

& BEHOLDING IN THIS MANNER - seems to emphasise that Arjuna had asked to see the armies gathered to fight and should look at them as armies and warriors who a re fighting on two sides - not as his family.

The message may be that part of the fight is - renunciation - not only fighting the desires. {Explained later starting 03-36} Leting go of desires-desiring, not just overpowering kaama or subduing it. This may be linked to 01-01 shloka. Later on shRii kRiishhNa often addresses Arjuna as bhaarataH, almost to remind him that if he is going to follow the family tradition, he should follow that of king bharata, rather than clinging to the kuru tradition, even if it is out of respect for his blind uncle and affection for bhiishhmaH & droNaH.

01-28..30

Seeing "all of my own people" O kRiishhNa all gathered here to fight, my extremities are weakening and my mouth is drying.

My body is trembling and my hair is standing on end. My bow is slipping from my hand and my skin is beyond burning.

I am unable to keep my composure/resolve, my mind is wandering unfocused and I visualize dire inasupicious omens.

This is a detailed physiological description of how it feels to get overly stimulated to the point of becoming unable to function.

As it is explained later in the ending shlokaH of the 3rd Adhyaya {03-36+}, the loss of control starts with a mistaken belief or paralogical connection {deluded thinking} either because of excessive attachment or trying to justify such attachment. Also, it can be from the denial of the attachment while continuing to indulge in it. This is rationalized-justified using paralogical connection.

The mechanism starts with desiring, the frustration of which results in feeling of anger and deprivation. Sometimes the frustration can be anticipated criticism or rejection. The justification follows the steps of because-therefore/therefore-because providing both the specious logic and the self delusion. Often the multitude of desires are "accepted"as proof of the necessity and validity of what they are doing. In this manner, not only the senses in the sense organs but also the mind and the intelligence are used as tools, to attain what is being desired without accepting the reality.

Example of deluded thinking and conclusions = because I want it – therefore it must be an essential necessity. Because it is essential and necessary – therefore anything that I do is justified and the correct course of action. Because I am righteous – therefore anyone or anything that stops me can be attacked {rejected-eliminated-ignored}.

In these shlokaH Arjuna starts the cycle by the use of the definition svajanaM. This most likely embodies the childhood apperception of rejection and the desire to be accepted and cherished by the kuru family as the star or the most precious member. It is most likely directly related to the whole war not being necessary if the five brothers what accepted as part of the kuru family with equal share in the kingdom. This acceptance would also entitle him to do Monday man fighting for a share of the kingdom.

This leads to the conclusion – that which is redirection he reaches out and strikes someone, they are going to be one of his own people. This is of sin extremities which would be using the weapons feeling weak. The mouth becoming dry is typically a description of feeling short of breath because of that adrenaline rush, breathing through the mouth. It can also reflect the confusion in the mind with multiple contradictory because-therefore thoughts wanting to come out at the same time, with the speaking center of the mouth unable to pick and choose, so it stays open without speaking.

Almost all of our muscles act in maintaining an equilibrium. They do not act exactly equally and opposite to each other. There are elements of speed, power, frequency which all figure into the equation. However, when both sets of muscles start acting, the mutually block each other so well that only many-movements are possible. This is trembling. Part of the intense excitement is the fight-flight response – often expedients to as the body hair standing on end, sometimes contributing a sense of tingling or increased awareness. The bowl may be slipping from the hand because the hand is not able to grasp that properly or because of the sustained tension it starts sweating. When all of this built up energy is not discharged into action, it is often dissipated through the skin particularly as the person attempts to relax them self or control this surge off fight-flight excitation. This can be more intense than passing a part of the body through fire, as the sensation seems to be originating in the nerves all over the body beneath the skin.

The intense excitation combined with the lack of action pops the proverbial bubble – making the person of their off the because-therefore thinking in the mind. This often results in a racing mind. The racing mind is most commonly thinking many things without completing thoughts, and without sequencing them together into thinking. The usual Pac-10 that is followed in such circumstances is deciding thought most that is possible, often presented to the bitterness as of here of losing it – which is often perceived as undesirable outcomes unless they act or even if they acted, and as inauspicious omens when the outcomes are seen as being out of control. This is often the first step to precipitate the diffusion of thinking that ends up in paranoia and confusion, that the in modern times call psychosis.

Which leads to Arjuna stating ...

01-31

and no good will result in killing my kinsmen in battle, nor do I desire victory kRiishhNa, not kingdom nor happiness.

It is very difficult to give up the because-therefore reasoning which carries with it intense passion and conviction. A tacit acknowledgment of this is given in the choice of the words of Arjuna - sukha-ani. pleasure/happy-not-inside. Negation of the state of pleasure - gratification, which was the original source of the desiring and the conflict expressed in 01-28.

Often the same because-therefore reasoning is utilized to justify Dana action or the change in the plan. It is also seen as an attempt to hold on to sanity, to avoid admitting to a loss of control or purpose.

Here Arjuna seems to be saying – because I do not want happiness – therefore I do not need the kingdom. Because I do not desire victory in battle – therefore there is no reason to kill my own family members, related by blood and marriage.

It has been my experience that we do what Arjuna does here very often, more often than we are aware of, many times not as completely as explained here.

The above mechanism is also responsible for what we call – paralyzing anxiety – panic – total confusion – racing mind – blank mind – mania.

The value of the "question" and the "person asking the question" was explored.

The person who asks the question is not an object of derision…

– It takes courage to strive for something that is important to the person

– it takes courage and confidence to ask a question not knowing if it will be explained {reply given} or used as an invitation for ridicule or the straight line for a snappy joke/answer… {More of this in 02-47}

– it takes intelligence to become aware that the existing knowledge base is incomplete

– it takes "smarts", to phrase the search for knowledge, the doubt, the awareness of lack of understanding in a way that clearly communicates the intent and the content

– it takes confidence, self-awareness and trust to be willing to "exhibit" limitations… {More of this in 02-31}

– often the person asking the question, is voicing the question of many who were too timid, lacking in self-confidence or unwilling to ask the question

– the question also gives a base for the answer while also giving it meaning

bRiiHadaaraNyak upanishad...

The finger is speechless, the speech is pointless

the meaning of the answer is in the question asked

– the question, indicates not only what is being sought, but also the extent of what is known… Which allows the person offering the answer to "match" it to the question

– the question indicates the "thinking inside the box"...and also the desire and attempt at "thinking outside the box."

Matching the answer allows the expansion of the limitations of the box…{knowledge-base, mind, intellect & wisdom}

and in the process Helping with "thinking outside of the box".

– PERHAPS ONE OF THE GREATEST ADVANTAGES OF THE QUESTION is that it opens the door to self-awareness. It is the first step on the middle path bauddhaH dharmaH. It is the first step to becoming aware of the same-different qualities and nature of needs versus desiring {kaama}.

Growing up can be defined as not only the awareness of needs versus desiring but also the ability to separate needs from desiring, which can be easily measured by the degree that we say NO to ourselves. {More of this later in chaturavaRaNaH «incorrectly called the four caste system»}.

HOW DO WE KNOW THAT ARJUNA AND THE PAANDAVA WERE IN THE RIGHT? RIGHT IN FIGHTING? RIGHT IN THE CLAIM ON THE KINGDOM?

– The short answer is… shRiikRiishhNa was on their side... Therefore all the right was also on their site

– the discussion was for the long answer

· king bharata having established the application of the dharma, that the choice of the King cannot be based on birth but is determined by ability-achievement {yogayata}.

· The blind brother dhRiitaraashhTra could not be King, being blind he can neither recognize the enemy nor to protect the country. Therefore he had no right to determine the next King.

· paaNDu at the same time was crowned the king. And retained the rights to determine who will be the crown Prince. However, he could not establish or transfer this write to anyone who was considered unfit to be a king like his brother.

· By the rules of the time, if the king died without determining the successor, then the Council of ministers would pick someone deserving from his children. If this was not possible then the search would expand into other mail members related by blood or marriage.

· yuddhishhThira the eldest paaNDava had been designated the yuvaraaja -- crown Prince

· part of the kingdom was given to him as a separate kingdom, khaaNDavaprasthaH on his return following the marriage with dRaupadi.

· This was lost in the gambling match against shakuni-duryodhana

· this was returned by the blind King following the threats of dRaupadi to invoke a shraapa

· this was gambled away again for a term of 12 years, with the condition of staying in hiding undetected for a one-year

· they successfully completed this. They were supposed to be given back their kingdom and duryodhana was to exile himself for 12 years.

· These conditions were not kept

· they are asked for their part of the kingdom, respectfully sending the raajapurohita, state-head-priest from panchaaLa.

· shRiikRiishhNa made still another attempt in which he tried to negotiate for 5 villages instead of the kingdom

· and many on the side of the kuru agreed that the kingdom should be to because the paaNDava were in the right

· the challenge for a war was first made by duryodhana

· ... So history stays that Arjuna was in the right.

WHY DO THEY SAY THIS WAS THE GREATEST WAR? IN WHAT WAYS WAS IT DIFFERENT?

Because the fight was not about getting back kingdom, as there are many fights like that. Non-was it to acquire property or a new kingdom.

That the fight was about lifestyles.

The kuru lifestyle was characterized by nepotism – unfairly seizing property – not respecting government – crimes against women – a philosophy of personal gratification – the rules do not apply to me – I am above the law – nobody is safe from us – culture and policy is what we say it is.

This lifestyle was Adhaarmik – dharma-NOT and it was necessary to re-establish a naviina-samaaja - a new society based on equality, safety, equal opportunity as had been last established by King bharata in hastiinaapura and later by yadu in mathuraa.

21ST CENTURY – at times it seems like not much has changed! Perhaps Arjuna is missing… And also shRiikRiishhNa.

HOW CAN WE APPLY THE LESSONS AND THE PRINCIPLES of the shRiimadbhagvadgiitaa IN EVERYDAY LIFE?

– lifestyle is a pattern of behaviors and relationships which is spiritual-physical-emotional-mental on a daily basis

– lifestyle is like a potpourri of "many habits"… Habit is a neurologically and mentally preferred pattern of actions and responses that is executed with skills and success

– waiting for the perfect moment when every element is so clear that we can apply the shRiimadbhagvadgiitaa with confidence and guaranteed success… Is like waiting for the blind King to start seeing – which is possible but rarely happens… and after a very long time.

– the approach of… Carpe diem momento… Seize the day {and} the moment… Is more in keeping with the quintessence of the shRiimadbhagvadgiitaa. Being able to identify the need to execute karma ... {more of this in 02-69 and }. Doing this without any guarantee of success… {More of this in 02-47}, being aware of and using The Self as a guide {the self here is the part of the UNCONSCIOUS MIND, not just the morality of conscience}… {More of this in 02-53}... And in the dharma of shRii kRiishhNa – {more of this in 02-31}

– the more that we start applying it, the more it becomes a part of us – the more it changes from habits into a lifestyle and orientation

THERE WAS A BRIEF BUT INTERRUPTED DISCUSSION ON THE NEED TO "STAY WITHIN THE EXAMPLE" WHILE DISCUSSING THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE shRiimadbhagvadgiitaa IN EVERYDAY LIFE.

Perhaps the best way to understand the shRiimadbhagvadgiitaa, is in the context of kathaa, stories from the mahaabhaarata, or examples that are used in the satsangha.

This is the basis of buddha Dharma .. also tuRiiya {kabiira and siikha}-- and casuistry.

It is the application of the principles to the example and not vice versa.

It is the definitive approach that the means {principles} explain and justify the ends {examples, application in daily living}.

It is not the claim or the Demand of this approach, that everything is included and explained in the example.

It is a reminder that staying within the limits of the example will reduce confusion and conflict and result in more complete clarification and implementation of the pirnciples.

THE MAIN LIMITATION IS... That the intrinsic process of learning and acquiring skills to adapt or corporate with everyday life ais predicated on the twin processes of...

ASSIMILATION… Is taking in information, how it was perceived, how experienced almost unchanged

ACCOMMODATION… Is the simultaneous and sometimes confusing process of adapting already learned information to accommodate the new information

INTERNALIZATION {INTEGRATION}… Is the final goal in which both of the above processes are integrated. This is a complex process which is similar to turning on the DVR while channel surfing. It is not only difficult to they create an individual channel, sometimes the recording is too confusing and has to be promptly deleted to make space in the brain. When it is successfully retained, it has elements of thinking both conscious and partially unconscious – processing of language including conceptualization – visualization and experiencing in 3-D + 4D – rehearsing/reviewing the edited recording and repeatedly editing and combining them with other recordings.

THE MAJOR DIFFICULTY FACED BY THE mumukshu THE STUDENT WHO IS TRYING TO IMPLEMENT the shRiimadbhagvadgiitaa IN EVERYDAY LIFE –

is the new thinking that is acquired by applying principles which are absolute and cosmic

in the small micro cosmos, the mini-kshetra of daily activities and experiences

TWO STEPS ARE NECESSARY TO ACCOMPLISH THIS

1 18-66, giving up preconceived notions of "knowing" what is really dharma and karma

2 one-way application of the principles of the shRiimadbhagvadgiitaa leading to the implementation in everyday life

and not doing this backwards.

THE QUESTION WAS ASKED – WHAT DO YOU DO IF YOU SEE SOMEBODY THAT YOU LIKE OR LOVE, SOMEONE WHO IS A FRIEND OR FAMILY DOING SOMETHING WRONG? HOW FAR DO YOU GO TO STOP THEM?

Do you walk away, reminding your self that they are also a grown-up person who can consciously make a determination of right and wrong

– do you stop them, and if so how? How far do you go? To the point of using violence against them?

SEVERAL FACTORS WERE IDENTIFIED...

-- how serious is the "wrong"

-- how serious the likely outcome

-- how many are effected

-- who else can stop

-- are you willing to risk injury

-- is it better to get help or assistance

-- is someone designated to intervene, and are they available

-- part of avoiding injury is also avoiding injury to the person likely causing the injury, which raises concerns

-- can you extend the Me-My-Mine kshetra to include not only the person doing the wrong action but also those who are being wronged?

the discussion was left incomplete as the satsangha moved to the headlines.

IF WE EXPECT SOMEONE TO ATTEMPT TO STOP HARMFUL BEHAVIORS AND THEN FOLLOW IT UP TO MAKE SURE SOMETHING HAS BEEN DONE? IS THE SAME RULE AND EXPECTATION APPLICABLE TO THE PERSON WHO ACTUALLY MADE AN ATTEMPT TO STOP IT BUT DID NOT FOLLOW UP TO SEE IF IT IS HAPPENING AGAIN?

There was a spirited discussion on this issue using the example of vidura and the headlines.

The opinion was expressed that in mahaabhaarata, every major player contributed to the inevitability of the war – except for vidura.

The dissenting opinion was that vidura also contributed in a huge way – by his failure to inform bhiishhmaH that yuddhishhThira was alive and there was no need to consider the request of dhRiitaraashhTra to declare duryodhana as the crown Prince – yuvaraaja.

vidura was the star student of Bhishma. He had been taught not only deva Dharma but also raaja dharma and desha Dharma

– the message was scratch that the lessons were clear – no kingdom can have two Crown Princes -only one yuva raaja. You do not divide the kingdom and risk Civil War, either during the division or afterwards, as both would have to be crowned Kings

Certainly he had saved the five paaNDava brothers and their mother from the burning house, and encouraged them to go into hiding. Even this was clearly a mistake. His excuse that the patient would have done nothing because he is tied to the throne by his promise to his father shaantanu. This is clearly deluded thinking.

yuddhishhThira having been designated as the yuva raaja was now a part of the throne. However, duryodhana was not. He probably would not have been killed at the request of dhRiitaraashhTra, but would have probably been exiled to keep him out of jail.

WAS THIS A SMALL MISTAKE ON THE PART OF vidura?

Analysis clearly indicates that this was a big mistake as it created an impossible situation. Bhishma later on agreed to the division of the kingdom, even though the setup the Civil War. These two decisions on the part of vidura reflect the big problem that is attached to the immediacy of the situation and the need to act together with the unavailability of others to take action -- and the lesser more indirect advice to the paaNDava to live in hiding after being rescued from the burning palace.

HEADLINES AND IMPLEMENTING THE shRiimadbhagvadgiitaa

THE BOY IS 10 years old, naked, in clear view, being sodomized by an adult. There is no one is there. This is not stopped. Help is not called for. He walks away.

THIS IS A HUGE RESPONSIBILITY THAT NO ONE ELSE CAN SHARE

CONTRASTING THIS WITH THE BLIND KING – JOE PA

the responsibility of the King is the protection of divinity citizen regardless of their economic, political, social ranking in importance. The responsibilities greater in protecting the birthright of those who are unable to protect themselves.

The blind King decided that rather than make waves, make an issue of whatever he was told – it was more important to maintain his empire and the legacy of football.

THIS RAISES THE QUESTION WAS THE REAL KING paaNDu-jopa REALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR THE WAR...

And the answer is clearly and definitively… yes. When paaNDu returns in the night after having killed the Riishii unintentionally in a hunting accident, he agonized correctly that teh "accident" happened because of his own arrogance. He felt ashamed about it and wanted to punish himself to "atone", and also because no one else could punish the King. He decides to go into exile and asks his blind brother to take care of the day to day running of the kingdom. He felt so ashamed of what he had done, that he did not tell Bhishma and left in the night itself.

The correct procedure would have been to convene a Council of the ministers, ask their advice including that of Bhishma -and then declare his intention... that his brother will remain a caretaker - as it had already been determined that his blind brother could not be a king - Raaja.

This would have prevented dhRiitaraashhTra from claiming that he was designated as the interim King.

Therefore it would be correct to state that the war was actually started by paaNDu himself.

HEADLINES AGAIN – the man who was in charge of the place where the abuse happened, was the boss of the "valued assistant" who was helping him create a legacy of defensive victories – was definitely responsible.

It was not enough to walk away from the retirement party of the abuser – as long as he was celebrating the successes of his defensive coaching on the field.

There may be a huge element of contributory negligence, some may even say, similar or equal to the graduate assisstant - almost like being an "accessory after the fact". {fact = corpus delicti = body of facts}.

01-31

Even focusing exclusively on victory, I cannot see any happiness in challenging and killing my kinsmen invited here to fight. O kRiishhNa, I do not desire the kingdom nor much bliss.

this shloka was also integrated into the discussion expanding it to the headlines.

Arjuna appears to want to make sense of his physical and emotional turmoil, the contrasting emotions and confusion from the plethora of thoughts battling in his mind. This also may be marking the beginning of tyaaga, renunciation.

This is reflected in teh impossibility of what he wants to do.

Almost everything is a mixture of positive-negative, of good-bad or good-evil. These are almost impossible to separate.

Pouring out a can of coca-cola in a pristine river, and then attempting to dip the can in the water and remove the coca-cola without disturbing the pure water of the river. This is "impossible".

Arjuna here is trying to get control of his out-of-control feelings and confused thinking - by discounting his desires while at the same time remaining in context of kinsmen {related by blood or marraige}.

It is a little like talking to oneself. This is often presented in the literature is a futile exercise that is self-serving and narcissistic.

MEDICALLY SPEAKING this is a very good practical strategy as the brain-mind circuits involved with speaking aloud, listening to what is spoken are same-different than "talking inside the head {thinking}". We start comparing what we are seeing with what has been said before by others which comprise the memories and the learned skills from our past experiences. This involves the mirroring neuron circuits and their connection to the long-term memory storage centers. Talking makes the connection to feelings giving 3-D if not a 4D corrective emotional experience across time-space-apperceptions.

This mechanism is also invoked when we are reading aloud but to a limited extent. It is also the physiological basis for the "oral tradition" of the guru-shisshu paraMparaa.

WHY DID ARJUNA SUDDENLY REALIZE THAT HE WAS FIGHTING HIS KINSMEN?

Arjuna was aware that he would be fighting his kinsmen. He knew that coming into the war.

The warrior focus is on winning the war, eliminating the enemy. Since killing does not come naturally, except to those on the call psychopathic or sociopathic. Those few people who are not only while and, have a apperception of being victims and do not recognize the humanity of other persons. The warrior objectifies the people he is going to fight and kill as the enemy. Standing on top of his war chariot in between the two armies, on the battlefield, surveying the battle formations and developing a battle strategy – the smart warrior. Please the video recordings from previous battles to figure out the strengths and weaknesses of the enemy.

Since much of this information was obtained from living with them in the past, they started becoming family instead of just enemy. Looking at the two armies opposing each other, with people on both sides being related by blood or marriage – he realized the impossibility of separating his feelings of wanting to protect and fight for family from not anger and desire to kill family. This confusion is reflected in the earlier shlokaH.

It is like pouring a can of Pepsi in a swimming pool, and then taking a stick and hitting the water hoping to separate the pool water from the Pepsi.

SCIENTIFICALLY SPEAKING it is the experimental-laboratory process of mixing two or more things and then attempting to separate them through – distilling them – freezing them – applying the electric current or electromagnetic field – combining them with a different component/compound.

The process was started by shRiikRiishhNa emphasizing in 01-25 that he should really look and move away from what he has seen with his eyes.

– It also reflects the inability of Arjuna to do so, which is reflected in 01-28/29/30.

– He finally seems to start making sense of it in 01-31 and develops the team further in the next few shlokaH

Acknowledgements:

I would like to thank Dr. Lal for the contribution.

Lessons from Bagawadh Giita

Tuesday, January 31, 2012

Lesson 3

Sunday, January 29, 2012

Lesson-2